Page 82 - 5_COMPENDIUM VOL-5

VOLUME – V CHAPTER 1

10
Ors. v. Major General Shri Kant Sharma & Anr. , was against the

well-settled principle of law and established judicial precedent since that

judgment sought to create a complete bar to the High Court’s power to

review decisions arising from the Armed Forces Tribunal under Article

226 of the Constitution of India. Such a complete bar is contrary to the

Constitution Bench decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra

12
11
Kumar and S.N. Mukherjee . What was significant, it was urged, that
13
the decision in Major General Shri Kant Sharma & Anr. failed to

consider that an aggrieved person in a service matter, if restrained from

approaching the High Court, would be left with no legal recourse to

approach any appellate authority, including the Supreme Court, since

service matters are private in nature and do not involve “point of law of

general public importance” under Section 31 of the said Act read with

Article 136(2) of the Constitution.

14. The view, thus, was stated to be in direct conflict with the

14
observations of the seven-Judges’ Bench in L. Chandra Kumar in para

79, which reads as under:-

10
(2015) 6 SCC 773
11
(supra)
12 (supra)
13
(supra)
14
(supra)
9

70